A&A 391, L17-L20 (2002)
DOI: 10.1051/0004-6361:20021011
S. Dreizler1 - T. Rauch1,2 - P. Hauschildt3 - S. L. Schuh1 - W. Kley4 - K. Werner1
1 -
Institut für Astronomie und Astrophysik, Abt. Astronomie, Sand 1, Universität Tübingen, 72076
Tübingen, Germany
2 -
Dr. Remeis-Sternwarte, Sternwartstraße 7, 96049 Bamberg, Germany
3 -
Dept. of Physics & Astronomy, The University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602-2451, USA
4 -
Institut für Astronomie und Astrophysik, Abt. Computational Physics, Auf der Morgenstelle 10,
Universität Tübingen, 72076 Tübingen, Germany
Received 7 June 2002 / Accepted 9 July 2002
Abstract
Recently, 46 low-luminosity object transits were reported from
the Optical Gravitational Lensing Experiment. Our follow-up spectroscopy
of the 16 most promising candidates provides a spectral classification of the
primary. Together with theradius ratio from the transit measurements, we
derived the radii of the low-luminosity companions. This allows to
examinethe possible sub-stellar nature of these objects. Fourteen of them
can be clearly identified as low-mass stars. Two objects,
OGLE-TR-03 and OGLE-TR-10 have companions with radii of
0.15
which is very similar to the radius of the transiting planet
HD 209458 B. The planetary nature of these two objects should therefore
be confirmed by dynamical mass determinations.
Key words: binaries: eclipsing - stars: low-mass - stars: brown dwarfs - stars: planetary systems
The Doppler method is subject to several selection effects which are problematic for a more general understanding of planet formation and evolution. It is mainly applied to solar like stars (spectral type F--K) because they provide sufficient lines to measure the radial velocity with the required precision of the order of m/s. Radial velocity detections favor close-in and massive planets. Therefore, many Jovian planets are found within Mercury-like orbits. Regardless of the selection effects, the detection of extra-solar planets has already had a large impact on the understanding and evolution of planetary systems. Establishing a less biased sample would, however, be a big step forward.
No planet has yet been found by photometric monitoring. The (currently) unique planetary companion of HD 209458 has an orbital inclination which allows the measurement of the eclipse of the host star by the planet (Charbonneau et al. 2000; Henry et al. 2000). This planetary companion was, however, known before from Doppler measurements (Mazeh et al. 2000). Recently 46 transiting planet candidates were announced by the OGLE (Optical Gravitational Lensing Experiment) consortium (Udalski et al. 2002). These candidates were extracted from a sample of about 5 million stars observed during a 32-day photometric monitoring. In a sub-sample of 52 000 stars with a photometric accuracy better than 1.5%, these 46 candidates exhibit light curves indicating the presence of a transiting low-luminosity companion. From the analyses of the light curves, the radii of the visible primaries and of the invisible secondaries were derived. Up to now, no spectroscopic information of the primary is available. The goal of this project is to provide this information and to infer the nature of these low-luminosity companions.
We will describe the observations, data reduction and discuss the determination of the spectral types of the primaries in Sect. 2. The results are discussed in Sect. 3.
![]() |
Figure 1: OGLE-TR-10 (bottom) compared to three template spectra with the best matching one in the middle. Main differences are the strengths of the Balmer lines and of the G-band. |
| Open with DEXTER | |
The obtained spectra are compared to the spectral library of
Silva & Cornell (1992) which provides templates in steps of about 0.3
spectral classes. We use them without interpolation within the library. The quality
of the match between observed and template spectrum is determined with a
test. Re-binning the observed spectra and the templates to a
common wavelength grid with 590 spectral bins, we obtain reduced
close
to unity for the best fits. Deviation in the
from the best fit
to the neighboring templates corresponds to deviations of more than
3
.
The fitting therefore provides a classification better than half a spectral class.
In Fig. 1 we compare the most promising candidate
OGLE-TR-10 with the best matching template and the next earlier and
later library spectrum. While e.g. hydrogen Balmer lines become too shallow in the
G6V template compared to the target star, they are too strong in the F9V
template. We restricted the classification to the luminosity class V since
the observed orbital periods indicate an orbital separation of the order of
ten solar radii and therefore prohibit the presence of a larger star. The
spectral classifications of all objects are displayed in Fig. 2.
The presence of the companion could not be detected from our data,
neither from double lined spectra nor from the flux distribution.
![]() |
Figure 2: Spectra of our target stars with our spectral classification. The spectral types cover stars from the maximum down to vanishing Balmer lines. Also visible is the maximum strength of the Ca H and K doublet as well as the increasing strength of the G-band. We do not find spectral signature of the low-luminosity companion. |
| Open with DEXTER | |
| mmag | SP | ||||||
| 2 | 19 | A7 | 1.62 | 0.13 | 0.21 | 0.20 | 0.11 |
| 3 | 19 | F9 | 1.14 | 0.13 | 0.15 | 0.13 | 0.12 |
| 4 | 65 | F0 | 1.50 | 0.24 | 0.36 | 0.37 | 0.23 |
| 5 | 43 | F0 | 1.50 | 0.20 | 0.30 | 0.30 | 0.19 |
| 6 | 53 | G2 | 1.00 | 0.22 | 0.22 | 0.22 | 0.22 |
| 8 | 48 | F9 | 1.14 | 0.21 | 0.24 | 0.23 | 0.21 |
| 9 | 48 | A3 | 1.98 | 0.21 | 0.41 | 0.43 | 0.18 |
| 10 | 22 | G2 | 1.00 | 0.14 | 0.15 | 0.13 | 0.13 |
| 12 | 38 | F9 | 1.14 | 0.19 | 0.21 | 0.20 | 0.18 |
| 14 | 34 | F0 | 1.50 | 0.18 | 0.26 | 0.26 | 0.16 |
| 19 | 65 | K4 | 0.75 | 0.24 | 0.18 | 0.17 | 0.24 |
| 32 | 34 | F0 | 1.50 | 0.18 | 0.26 | 0.26 | 0.16 |
| 35 | 30 | F9 | 1.14 | 0.17 | 0.19 | 0.18 | 0.16 |
| 38 | 48 | A8 | 1.58 | 0.21 | 0.33 | 0.34 | 0.19 |
| 40 | 26 | F0 | 1.50 | 0.15 | 0.23 | 0.22 | 0.14 |
| 45 | 62 | F7 | 1.22 | 0.24 | 0.29 | 0.29 | 0.23 |
| 10 | 22 | F9 | 1.14 | 0.14 | 0.16 | 0.15 | 0.13 |
| 10 | 22 | G2 | 1.00 | 0.14 | 0.15 | 0.13 | 0.13 |
| 10 | 22 | G6 | 0.91 | 0.14 | 0.13 | 0.11 | 0.12 |
We then used the derived spectral classes to estimate the stellar radii of the primary stars (Table 1) using the tabulated values from Cox (2000). The photometric monitoring of Udalski et al. (2002) provides the brightness variation during eclipses. Assuming a negligible radiation from the secondary and a central passage in front of the primary this brightness variation is directly proportional to the radius ratio. Multiplied with the primary radius it yields the radius of the secondary. Finally, we used the evolutionary models for low mass stars (thick lines Fig. 3) to obtain the mass of the secondary assuming it to be a low-mass star. The more sophisticated approach towards radius ratios, i.e. to model the eclipse light curves with the derived primary radii as constraint seems to be unnecessary with the current data set, because the error for the companion radius is dominated by the uncertainty of spectral classification of the primaries and of the tabulated radii of the spectral type standards. Table 1 additionally provides an estimate of the uncertainties in the companion radius introduced by our spectral classification. This error is small enough to obtain a quite clear picture of the nature of the secondary star.
| |
Figure 3: Companion radii compared to evolutionary tracks of Baraffe et al. (1998), Chabrier et al. (2002), and Baraffe et al. (2002) in the HRD. Thick lines: stellar models, dashed lines: brown-dwarf models, dotted lines: gas-giant models. Note that the sub-stellar models are for isolated objects. Masses and radii are given in solar units. The inset figure shows the mass-radius relation for low-mass stars at an age of 5 Gyr. |
| Open with DEXTER | |
For the following discussion we assume that the OGLE-transits are undisturbed from blends of very nearby stars on the sky and that the transits are no grazing-incident eclipses. Even though these possibilities can not be completely ruled out, the former scenario seems unlikely because we do not detect an additional spectral contribution, the latter one because the photometry indicates flat-bottomed light curves.
All low-mass companions are found to have radii consistent with low-mass
stars of about M0V or later (Cox 2000). For all except two objects our relatively
large radii do not allow an interpretation as sub-stellar objects. This
list of low-mass star companions includes the best planetary companion
candidate, OGLE-TR-40, from Udalski et al. (2002), who derived a
companion radius of 0.1
.
Modeling the eclipse light curve, they
derived a primary radius of 0.73
,
which can be clearly
excluded from our spectroscopic determination. These systems are, however,
also interesting. As indicated in Table 1, the mass ratio for
these binary stars is quite extreme. he formation of a close binary out of a
common proto-stellar disk favors typically a mass ratio of about unity
(e.g. Bate & Bonnell 1997). These
low-mass objects in eclipsing binaries can also be used to calibrate the
mass-radius relation of these stars, providing constraints for evolutionary
models. This seems to be required since discrepancies are reported by
Torres & Ribas (2002).
For two objects, OGLE-TR-03 and OGLE-TR-10, the derived
radius of 0.15
does allow an interpretation as sub-stellar
objects. The latter was also among the two top candidates of
Udalski et al. (2002). In this case our spectroscopic determination fits
reasonably well with the light curve fit. In the case of
OGLE-TR-03, our radius is smaller than the one derived by
Udalski et al. (2002).
Figure 3 shows that sub-stellar objects can be as
large as 0.15
,
but only during a very early phase of their
evolution, i.e. 0.1 Gyr for a 0.05
brown dwarf and during
5 Myr for a 0.002
gas giant. It should be noted
that these tracks are calculated for isolated sub-stellar objects. The
separation of a few solar radii (derived from the orbital period and the
assumption that the companion mass is negligible) does indicate a strong
influence of the secondary. Theoretical models for sub-stellar companions
taking the irradiation of the primary into account are currently worked
on (e.g. Burrows et al. 2000) and show that the large radii result
from the high residual entropy remaining from the early proximity of a
luminous companion. For the presently only known
transiting gas giant planet, HD 209458B, this effect is indeed
observed. The derived radius is about 0.14
,
despite the age of
probably several Gyrs.
The
same is possible for OGLE-TR-03 and OGLE-TR-10. While
OGLE-TR-10 would be nearly a twin of the HD 209458 system
regarding orbital period, spectral type of the primary, and companion
radius, OGLE-TR-03 would be even more extreme. The orbital period
is only 1.18 days resulting in a separation of only 5.4
.
In
combination with the earlier spectral type, the irradiation is even more
drastic.
In summary, the spectroscopic follow-up of the most promising planetary transit candidates did not result in a clear identification of a new sub-stellar object, moreover most of the candidates could be identified as low-mass stars. Two objects did, however, pass this spectroscopic test and therefore continue to qualify as planetary candidates. The ultimate determination of their nature does require a detailed study of radial velocity variations with very high precision. Dynamical mass determination of the secondaries with less demanding instrumental requirement will provide more insight in the mass-radius relation at the lower end of the main sequence.
Acknowledgements
We use observations made at the South African Astronomical Observatory (SAAO). T.R. acknowledges a travel grant from the DFG (RA 733/11-1). This research was supported by the DLR under grant 50 OR 0201 (Tübingen).